On 05/21/2012 JOHN MORIARTY filed a Property - Other Real Property lawsuit against 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC. This case was filed in San Francisco County Superior Courts , Civic Center Courthouse located in San Francisco, California. The case status is Not Classified By Court.
*******0970
05/21/2012
Not Classified By Court
San Francisco County Superior Courts
Civic Center Courthouse
San Francisco, California
MORIARTY, JOHN
2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC
DOES 1 THRU 50, INCL
LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
LARAMAR SF URBAN APARTMENTS
LARAMAR URBAN SPECIALTY PARTNERS
DOES 1 THRU 50, INCL.
LIFSCHITZ, ERIC
Attorney at LAW OFFICE OF ERIC L. LIFSCHITZ
345 Franklin Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
DOWLING, CURTIS F
Attorney at DOWLING & MARQUEZ, LLP
703 Market St Ste 1610
San Francisco, CA 94103
NEVIS, CHRISTOPER J.
Attorney at LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH
333 Bush Street, Ste 1100
San Francisco, CA 94104
TORSNEY, PATRICK J
Attorney at LAW OFFICES OF BAKER & ASSOCIATES
655 North Central Ave, Ste 2100
Glendale, CA 91203
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
OPPOSITION TO SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE (ALLEGED SLAPP) FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN
ASSOCIATION OF ATTORNEYS: NEVIS, CHRISTOPER J. ADDED AS ATTORNEY FOR LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
CERTIFICATION NOTICE
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 6.0 DAYS
ORDER CERTIFYING OPINION FOR PUBLICATION A137608 DIV 2
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 10.0 DAYS
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 10.0 DAYS
NOTICE OF TIME AND PLACE OF TRIAL, JURY TRIAL SET FOR JAN-12-2015 AT 09:30 AM IN DEPT. 206. CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ON JUL-30-2014 IS OFF CALENDAR. NOTICE SENT BY COURT.
PROOF OF SERVICE OF MOTION TO STRIKE FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE OF OCT-24-2012 CONTINUED TO DEC-05-2012 AT 2:00 PM IN DEPARTMENT 610. NOTICE SENT BY COURT.
REPLY MEMO OF P&A IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE PROFFERED IN OPPOS TO DEFTS SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE OF DEC-05-2012 CONTINUED TO JAN-23-2013 AT 10:30 AM IN DEPARTMENT 610. NOTICE SENT BY COURT.
REQUEST FOR CLERK'S/REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT (8.124)
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 14.0 DAYS
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 6.0 DAYS
DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF COMPLAINT AS TO DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION LARAMAR URBAN SPECIALTY PARTNERS
MASTER JURY CALENDAR SET FOR FEB-09-2015 VACATED. DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION FIELD ON 12/2/14. (206)
NOTICE OF ENTRY OF DISMISSAL AND PROOF OF SERVICE (TRANSACTION ID # 56573444) FILED BY DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC
CASE NOT ASSIGNED FOR MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE.
DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION OF ALL PARTIES AND ALL CAUSES OF ACTION WITH PREJUDICE
REVIEW FOR MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF COMPLAINT AS TO DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION LARAMAR URBAN SPECIALTY PARTNERS
OBJECTION HEARING JUL-30-2014; JUDGE CYNTHIA M. LEE; CLERK KCOX; PROCEEDINGS NOT REPORTED (610)
NOTICE OF TIME AND PLACE OF TRIAL, JURY TRIAL SET FOR FEB-09-2015 AT 9:30 AM IN DEPT. 206.
ADDED TO CALENDAR FOR OBJECTION HEARING HEARING SET FOR JUL-30-2014 AT 10:30 AM IN DEPT 610
NOTICE OF OBJECTION TO THE COURT'S NOTICE OF TIME AND PLACE OF TRIAL FILED BY DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION LARAMAR URBAN SPECIALTY PARTNERS LARAMAR SF URBAN APARTMENTS
OPPOSITION TO SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE (ALLEGED SLAPP) FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN
COURT REPORTING SERVICES LESS THAN 1 HOUR FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION (Fee:30.00)
DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
PROOF OF SERVICE OF MOTION TO STRIKE FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION HEARING SET FOR OCT-18-2012 AT 09:30 AM IN DEPT 302 (Fee:450.00)
SUMMONS ON COMPLAINT, PROOF OF SERVICE ONLY, FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN SERVED AUG-24-2012, PERSONAL SERVICE ON DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC
SUMMONS ON COMPLAINT, PROOF OF SERVICE ONLY, FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN SERVED AUG-24-2012, PERSONAL SERVICE ON DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF
QUIET TITLE - REAL PROPERTY, COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN AS TO DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION LARAMAR URBAN SPECIALTY PARTNERS LARAMAR SF URBAN APARTMENTS DOES 1 THRU 50, INCL. SUMMONS ISSUED, JUDICIAL COUNCIL CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET FILED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR OCT-24-2012 PROOF OF SERVICE DUE ON JUL-20-2012 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT DUE ON OCT-09-2012 (Fee:410.00)
As an eleventh affirmative defense, Defendants allege that, at all times, Defendants acted under legal right or in a good faith belief in the existence of a legal right.
As a twelfth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiff cannot prove any facts showing that Defendants® conduct was the proximate cause of any injuries or damages as alleged
in the Complaint.
As a thirteenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that by reason of Plaintiff’s own acts, omissions, representations and courses of conduct, Plaintiff is estopped from asserting, and has waived, any right to assert claims against Defendants.
As a fourteenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Defendants were not provided a reasonable opportunity to cure defects alleged in Plaintiffs Complaint.
Asa fifteenih affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiff surrendered and
abandoned possession of the subject premises.
As a sixteenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Defendants have actually
performed substantial rehabilitation work to the subject premises and, therefore, Plaintiff was not
damaged by the conduct of Defendants.
As a seventeenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that if hability is assessed against them, pursuant to Civil Code section 1431, et seq., Defendants shall be liable only for the amount of the non-economic damages allocated to them in direct proportion to the percentage of fault assessed against them by the tricr of fact and request that a separate judgment be rendered against
them only for that amount.
4825-1494-4795. 1 4 ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, LARAMAR URBAN
L~ = < -~ = U - W [ al
gfigaamuflcwmqmmamur-c
As an eighteenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiff failed to give adequate notice of the alleged breach of the warranty of habitability, that there was delay giving notice of a breach within a reasonable time of discovering the breach of the warranty of habitability, or when Plaintiff should have discovered the breach of the warranty of habitability, and therefore Plaintiff’s claims are barred.
| As a mineteenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that should Plaintiff recover from
Defendants, that Defendants are entitled to indemnification, either in whole or in part, from all
persons or entities whose negligence or fault proximately contributed to Plaintiff’s damages, if any
there were.
As a twentieth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiff’s Complaint is barred by the consent given by Plaintiff for Defendants to enter and by Civil Code section 1954, the landlord’s right of access to dwelling unit.
As a twenty-first affirmative defense, Defendants allege Plaintiff substantially and materially breached the obligation/contract complained of prior to the commencement of this action, which conduct extinguishes the right to maintain the instant action.
As a twenty-second affirmati've defense, Defendants allege that, at all times mentioned in
the Complaint, Defendants acted in good faith, with reasonable and probable cause for their
actions.
As a twenty-third affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred because Defendants fully complied with all obligations imposed by case law, statute, contract(s), or any other source.
Jonsl
Moriarty v. 2363 Van Ness Avenue, LLC, etal San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC-12-520970
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN F RANCISCO
At the time of service, I was over 18 yearsparty to the action. My business address is 333 Bush Street, Suite 1100, San Francisco, CA 94104-2872.
On June 10, 2014, I served the following document(s): ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,
LARAMAR URBAN SPECIALTY PARTNERS, AND LARAMAR SF URBAN
I served the documents on the following persons at the following addresses (including fax numbers and e-mail addresses, if applicable):
11 The documents were served by the following means:
12 || Bd (BY U.S. MAIL) I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses listed above and placed the envelope or package for collection
13 and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice for collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that
14 practice, on the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the U.S. Postal Service, in a sealed
15 envelope or package with the postage fully prepaid,
16 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct,
17 Executed on June 10, 2014, at San Francisco, California.
P At o
20 Carol Jensen |
4825-1494-4795 1 . ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, LARAMAR URBAN
4825-1494-4795 1 . ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, LARAMAR URBAN WOONJO\U‘:A(NN)—*
WOONJO\U‘:A(NN)—*
Yk <&
Moriarty v. 2363 Van Ness Avenue, LLC, et al. San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC-12-520970
Eric L. Lifschitz, Esq. Patrick J. Torsney, Esq.
Aaron H. Darsky, Esq. Law Offices of Baker & Associates
345 Franklin Strect 655 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2100
San Francisco, CA 94102 Glendale, CA 91203
T: (415) 553-6055; F: (415) 358-5647 T:(818) 638-8541; F: (818) 638-8549
Email: eric@franklinstreetiaw.com Email: ptorsney@offcofbakerandassoc.com aaron(@darskylaw.com | Co-Counsel for Defendant 2363 Van Ness
Attorneys for Plaintiff John Moriarty Avenue, LLC
Curtis F. Dowling, Esq.
Dowling & Marquez LLP
703 Market Street, Suite 1610
San Francisco, CA 94103
T: (415) 495-8500; F: (415) 495-8590 Email: curtis@dowlingmarquez.com Co-counsel for Defendant Laramar Management Corporation
2 ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORFPORATION, LARAMAR URBAN